iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Super Committee Democrats Reject Last-Ditch Republican Offer As Deadline Approaches

Deficit Super Committee Deadline

DAVID ESPO and ANDREW TAYLOR   11/18/11 05:49 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — Deadline nearing, the deficit-reduction talks in Congress sank toward gridlock Friday after supercommittee Democrats rejected a late Republican offer that included next-to-nothing in new tax revenue. Each side maneuvered to blame the other for a looming stalemate.

The panel faces a deadline of next Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving, and lawmakers on both sides stressed they were ready to meet through the weekend in a last-ditch search for compromise.

But there was little indication after a day of closed-door meetings that a breakthrough was likely, both Democrats and Republicans emphasizing long-held political positions.

"Where the divide is right now is over taxes, and whether the wealthiest Americans should share in the sacrifices," said Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the Democratic co-chair of the panel.

But Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, said Republicans had offered "a balanced, bipartisan plan - the fact that it was rejected makes it clear that Washington Democrats won't cut a dime in government spending without job-killing tax hikes."

While prospects for a deal faded, House Democrats checked a Republican attempt to pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. The vote was 261-165, or 23 shy of the two-thirds majority required. GOP lawmakers voted overwhelmingly in favor, while Democrats generally opposed it, sealing its doom.

The vote on a noisy House floor contrasted to the secretive proceedings inside the supercommittee, a panel that projected optimism when it began its quest for a deficit deal late last summer but has yet to come to any significant compromise.

Republicans disclosed during the day they had outlined an offer on Thursday for about $543 billion in spending cuts – leaving Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security untouched – and $3 billion in higher tax revenue.

Most if not all of the recommended savings were items that Democrats have agreed to in earlier talks, but only, party officials said, on condition they part of a larger deal in which Republicans agreed to additional tax increases.

Democrats have long demanded that Republicans agree to significant amounts of higher taxes on the wealthy as part of any deal, and they quickly rejected the offer, according to officials in both parties.

It was unclear where the talks would turn next, but the GOP proposal suggested the discussions had effectively moved into a range of savings far below the $1.2 trillion the committee has been seeking.

It also appeared Republicans were jettisoning a plan for $300 billion in higher tax revenue, an offer that had exposed internal GOP divisions when it was presented two weeks ago. It also has failed to generate momentum for a compromise among Democrats.

If the panel fails to reach agreement, $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts are to take effect beginning in 2013, a prospect that lawmakers in both parties say they want to avoid.

That is particularly true among defense hawks, who argue that the Pentagon cannot sustain the estimated $500 billion in cuts that would be required on top of the $450 billion already in the works.

In a letter to Murray and Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, the GOP chairman of the supercommittee, the head of the House Armed Services Committee warned of "immediate, dire and in some cases irrevocable" damage to the nation's military. "Our ability to respond to national security crises or humanitarian disasters would be disrupted," added Rep. Howard P. (Buck) McKeon, R-Calif.

Republicans familiar with the GOP plan said it included $543 billion in spending cuts, fees and other non-tax revenue, as well as the $3 billion corporate jet provision. There also would be $98 billion in reduced interest costs.

Officials familiar with the offer said it would save the government $121 billion by requiring federal civilian workers to contribute more to their pension plans, shave $23 billion from farm and nutrition programs and generate $15 billion from new auctions of broadcast spectrum to wireless companies.

It also would claim about $100 billion in savings from Pentagon civilian personnel costs and another $35 billion by increasing the fee that mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac charge lenders to guarantee repayment of new loans. The fee increase would add $15 a month to the monthly cost of an average new mortgage.

The per-ticket security fee to pay for Transportation Security Administration operations at the nation's airports would increase, and $18 billion would come from savings within Postal Service accounts.

__

Associated Press writer Donna Cassata contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — Deadline nearing, the deficit-reduction talks in Congress sank toward gridlock Friday after supercommittee Democrats rejected a late Republican offer that included next-to-nothing i...
WASHINGTON — Deadline nearing, the deficit-reduction talks in Congress sank toward gridlock Friday after supercommittee Democrats rejected a late Republican offer that included next-to-nothing i...
Filed by Nick Wing  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 52
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
lisakaz2
Da ministero dell'interno di Snark.
02:50 PM on 11/29/2011
All those cuts just for closing a corporate jet loophole. But not military cuts. The numbers are utter nonsense. Figures, since they come from the party of no facts.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
posie Di Sesa
06:24 PM on 11/18/2011
all i can say is, 'yippee!' stand your ground, dems, and don't give in to lousy proposals.
russeolson
I think. Therefore I am not ... a Republican
06:16 PM on 11/18/2011
The Republicans keep insulting our intelligence. We want those that created this recession to begin paying their share. We want those that ship American jobs overseas to pay a penalty for doing so (instead of getting a bonus for cutting costs at the expense of the American people). As Warren Buffet says "Quit cuddling us Billionaires".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giftsthatpurr
zestful life
05:07 PM on 11/18/2011
The public doesn't want cuts to Social Security and Medicare, and they DO want tax cuts to the uber-rich to be rolled back; but the Dems have stopped caving.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
relentless63
03:44 PM on 11/18/2011
What would these do nothing Washington types do if Americans still holding jobs did what the Super Committee has done, but more honestly? Suppose they just stayed home for a day or two and discussed.
labgal
Doo-Wop Forever
02:40 PM on 11/18/2011
If they cannot compromise, then they should all resign their seats effective immediately. At first I was thinking that lack of reaching a compromise should be eligible for the death penalty but since the holidays are almost here I decided to be generous and just accept their resignations. If they cannot compromise, they are not doing their jobs. Between the lack of compromise and wanting a balanced budget amendment to do their job for them, we could save money by hiring IBM's super-computer to do the job of senators and congresspeople. No salary, no benefits, no pension,no BS.
RACVC
Makes no sense. Makes perfect sense.
03:29 PM on 11/18/2011
Fanned.
I like your idea.
Put all the variables together and run it in a regression model for starters.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
election2012
An independent voice for the greater good.
01:51 PM on 11/18/2011
Dear fellow middle-class taxpayers: If the not-so-Super Committee fails: automatic defense cuts will kick in, SS/Medicare will be left alone, Bush-era tax cuts will expire. You won't see much of an increase in your taxes [you'll still have deductions, exemptions and credits if you play your cards right] but the ultra-wealthy will go back to paying higher, Clinton-era rates. All good things.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giftsthatpurr
zestful life
05:09 PM on 11/18/2011
Thanks for a great post! Fav'd
russeolson
I think. Therefore I am not ... a Republican
06:09 PM on 11/18/2011
Sounds good to me. Let's hope the Democrats finally say "No" to the Republican Agenda.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mc81360
3rd Bn 60th Infantry vet
01:33 PM on 11/18/2011
Boehner ran on jobs jobs jobs in 2010 and instead he wants cuts cuts cuts in senior care and social security .What a great man .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
election2012
An independent voice for the greater good.
01:24 PM on 11/18/2011
Surprise!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
RichPort
Don't blame me, I'm a stoned head...
01:17 PM on 11/18/2011
There should have been the following stipulation for being chosen a member of the super committee:

If a compromise is not agreed upon by the agreed upon date all members of the committee and the leaders from both parties in both Houses of Congress automatically lose their seats in Congress and all included pension and health benefits, and may not run for reelection or lobby Congress for 5 years, at which point, if reelected, their benefits packages would start from zero and be in the form of 401(k) and health care vouchers.

Bet they would have compromised by now...
RACVC
Makes no sense. Makes perfect sense.
03:31 PM on 11/18/2011
Exactly.
They have no skin in the game.
photo
Evil Twin Rove
No struggle, no progress
01:16 PM on 11/18/2011
this is such a joke and all unfortunately for show....

WHAT DID YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN WITH 12 MEMBERS?

they set it up like this so the result was predetermined... then when they claim to have been unable to find common ground, they can avoid blame and blame the other party...

our government is becoming useless
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
leedan
Sometimes you just have to shake your head at the
11:45 AM on 11/18/2011
Why not use the money saved from the wars to create jobs?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pmoschetta
Where are the Jobs, Speaker Boehner?
12:36 PM on 11/18/2011
Cry baby-Boehner has refused to even consider that as an option leedan
photo
Evil Twin Rove
No struggle, no progress
01:17 PM on 11/18/2011
at this point, I find it very hard to argue that we saved any money from these recent wars...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
leedan
Sometimes you just have to shake your head at the
03:15 PM on 11/18/2011
After we pull out use the money .nobeispent there.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
stopthemadness69
Real Americans care more about people than profits
11:36 AM on 11/18/2011
Finding a ton of additional revenue is really easy, if you are willing to look. 25 of this countries highest earners are hedgefund managers earning a combined 25 BILLION a year and paying 15% capital gains as opposed to 35% income tax and they pay 0% into SS or medicare. Simply asking them to pay income tax on their income, as opposed to capital gains tax, would net us an additional 50 BILLION over 10 years, just from 25 people. Not to mention the 2.7 million into ss over the next decade and the 7.25 Billion into medicare over the same 10 years, again from just 25 people.
RACVC
Makes no sense. Makes perfect sense.
03:33 PM on 11/18/2011
That makes too much sense.
We certainly can't have that.
11:22 AM on 11/18/2011
They have created another dilemma to save us from. This time they will save us from automatic cuts. (Automatic cuts that they created.)

We will pay even more to the health care industry and get less.
photo
Intolerantcentrist
No thanks…I brought my own air.
11:15 AM on 11/18/2011
Throw out the twelve delegates and replace them with twelve people picked randomly off the street. The chances of this new Committee actually accomplishing its tasks would increase dramatically.

That’s how inept Congress has become.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Dunkleberger Karl
Historian,Humanitarian,Hedonist.
03:50 PM on 11/18/2011
How random is random?